text:
Global Ethics Forum TV
Impact: Business Ethics
The Living War: World War I
Point B
Global Ethics Corner
Policy Innovations Digital Magazine (2006-2016)
Russia Bulletin (2012)
Morgenthau Lectures (1981–2006)
Human Rights Dialogue (1994–2005)
Feature Articles from Inprint Newsletter (2001–2004)
Case Studies Series (1989–2001)
Nizer Lectures (1994–1998)
Public Philosophy Monographs (1998)
Privatization Project (1991–1994)
Human Rights & Foreign Policy by Hans J. Morgenthau (1979)
WORLDVIEW Magazine (1958–1985)
The New Dimensions of Human Rights
Fourteenth Annual Morgenthau Memorial Lecture on Ethics and Foreign Policy
Zbigniew Brzezinski, Morgenthau Memorial Lecture, 1995
"Our contemporary politics is on the threshold of a new age. At one stage in the past, politics was driven by religious fervor as mankind tried to define its place in the universe. More recently it has been driven by ideological dogmas as mankind has tried to shape a heaven on earth for itself. Increasingly, politics is likely to be dominated by ethical dilemmas stimulated by science's potential for reshaping the very nature of the human being itself, thereby also placing on our agenda the ultimate question as to what, indeed, is the human being."
Every year the Carnegie Council on Ethics and International Affairs hosts this Morgenthau Memorial Lecture to honor the memory of Hans Morgenthau, a Council trustee for over twenty years who, before his death in 1980, was an essential figure in the study of ethical problems in international affairs.
Our purpose is to sponsor a public lecture by a distinguished speaker on a topic relating to ethics and contemporary foreign policy. This lecture gives us the opportunity to present in a public forum the best and most important thinking on the moral dimensions of foreign policy. In initiating and supporting events like this, the Carnegie Council seeks to keep alive the discussion of this important dimension of our national and international life and to provide a permanent home for it.
As I pondered how I would introduce this year's speaker, Zbigniew Brzezinski, I did what I usually do when looking for guidance and inspiration: I paced about my office and scanned the bookshelves. I found what I needed rather quickly this time, and I found it in the very essence of Dr. Brzezinski's books, in particular, in the title of his memoir of his years as President Carter's National Security Advisor, Power and Principle. Here are a title and a book very much in the tradition of Hans Morgenthau.
The Morgenthau legacy is one that understands the complex relationship between power and principle. It is a legacy that, for all of its realism, maintains that our understanding of international affairs cannot and should not be limited to Thucydides' reference to the Athenian generals who argued that "the strong do what they can and the weak do what they must."
Professor Morgenthau understood, as Dr. Brzezinski explains, that power must be understood in connection to principle: "Power can have no moral purpose divorced from principle and, conversely, principles have no chance for survival and little chance for constructive meaning without the support of power." It is this essential insight that links our speaker today with the legacy of Hans Morgenthau.
Dr. Brzezinski's topic today, "The New Dimensions of Human Rights," is especially relevant for those of us interested in ethics and international affairs. Where better to test the connection between power and principle than in this forum, and who better to enlighten us than Dr. Brzezinski? It was, after all, during the Carter presidency that human rights came into its own as an idea with great weight and much currency in both American foreign policy and in world politics generally. And, of course, Dr. Brzezinski has written and spoken about this issue with great insight ever since.
Zbigniew Brzezinski has served this country with distinction and he has made truly significant contributions to the intellectual life of our nation and the world.
Joel H. Rosenthal
Carnegie Council on Ethics and International Affairs
It is a great honor to deliver a lecture named after a preeminent scholar of international affairs, a scholar whose famed emphasis on the primacy of realism in international affairs led him to place major emphasis on the role of ethics in international affairs. I wish to repeat that point: It was his emphasis on realism that led him to stress the importance of ethics.
In my own discussion tonight of "The New Dimensions of Human Rights," I would like to begin with a brief personal recollection. One of the first issues that I confronted, in February 1977, as the newly installed national security advisor to the president of the United States, was whether the president should personally respond to a private letter from the Soviet dissident Andrei Sakharov, which he had received just at the time of his inauguration. Now, today, with many years in retrospect, it would seem to be a non-issue: Of course, I'm sure all of you would say, he should respond to a man who symbolized the quest for human rights, the man who stood for decency, the man who, even more important, was willing to pay an enormous personal price for his commitment to freedom. How could the president of the United States fail to respond?
And yet, in February of 1977, it didn't seem so simple. There were a number of people outside and inside the administration who feared that the new U.S. president, personally dedicated to peace and to détente with the Soviet Union, and very anxious to move forward on the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks, might provoke the anger of Soviet leaders by responding directly and personally to a private Soviet citizen who obviously was acting in defiance of the government's wishes. Hence, so went the argument, idealism should capitulate to realism. The president did respond, however; he provoked Brezhnev's ire; and he was criticized by some American commentators for having responded.
This very simple story highlights the first of the three new dimensions of human rights that I propose to discuss: namely, protection of the individual from the arbitrary power of the state. Emerging in the 1970s, it expressed itself in, among other things, formal legislation. Many of you may recall the Jackson-Vanick Amendment, which was deliberately designed to focus on the issue of human rights and to tie American foreign policy directly to it.
American efforts on behalf of such rights inevitably conflicted with other foreign policy objectives, giving rise to a persisting dilemma: how to balance the cause of human rights with the search for broader international stability, which necessarily includes some accommodation with an antagonistic state. This issue was not easy to resolve then and it still confronts us today. Principle and expediency obviously collide, though one can always find some formula for rationalizing the supremacy of one over the other.
Nonetheless, as a broad proposition I submit that, overtime, the notion of human rights as defined above has become a legitimate concern of the international community, and perhaps more so for the United States than for most other states. The acceptance of the importance of this issue was obviously connected with some very important social changes inherent in the history of our own age: Urbanization and the spread of literacy produced the phenomenon of mass political awakening, especially among the increasingly numerous young people of the world, who are very susceptible to mass mobilization through mass communications. It is simply a fact of life today that the populace can no longer be treated as passive objects by their political rulers. That fact itself dictates the increased salience of human rights, as defined in terms of the protection of the individual from the arbitrary power of the state.
We also have to note in this connection that the struggle against totalitarianism, which lasted for much of the twentieth century, elevated individual human rights to a central moral concern and into a major political weapon. I readily concede that there was an element of tactical expediency in our own focus on human rights. The issue provided a powerful ideological weapon in the struggle against the Soviet Union and its communist doctrine.
Bearing in mind the already noted phenomenon of mass political awakening, in my own speeches as National Security Advisor I would often, and very deliberately, use the phrase "human rights has become the genuine historical inevitability of our times." This phrase was meant to provide a rebuttal to the communist doctrine of the historical inevitability of class revolution. We posited instead that historical inevitability dictated the triumph of individual human rights that was inherent in the political transformation that mankind was experiencing, particularly in the phenomenon of mass political awakening with which we wanted to identify the forces of democracy and freedom.
This was our response to the challenge posed by the notion that so dominated our century: that a coercive utopia derived from dogmatic hubris, that a perfect society, a form of heaven on earth, could be constructed by political compulsion.
We all know what this phenomenon entailed. In one of its variances, the coercive utopia was to be accomplished by the elimination of enemies defined in terms of race. In the other, more enduring phenomenon of totalitarianism, coercive utopia was to be constructed by the elimination of enemies defined on the basis of class. But in both cases, the objective was to build a coercive utopia. In both cases, an extraordinary political hubris was reinforced by the doctrine of historical inevitability.
The appearance of the Solidarity movement in Poland, its replication elsewhere, and the eventual collapse of the Soviet totalitarian model validated the basic premise of our focus on human rights: that a system of total political compulsion, aiming not only at social reconstruction but even at the ideological molding of the human being, was not only morally wrong but historically doomed to fail.
Nonetheless, the old practical dilemmas continue to confront us. Should good relations with China, for example, or perhaps even its future role in the world, be a hostage to our concern for individual human rights? Should a partnership with today's Russia be fostered at the same time the Chechens continue to be deprived of their basic human rights? How do we balance these concerns?
These dilemmas are directly related to the second dimension of human rights, which has now become even more salient with the fall of communism. Initially, the issue of human rights in foreign policy involved largely the exposure and correction of abuse of individuals by the political power of the state. Now we focus increasingly on the institutionalization of democracy as a system—the second new dimension of human rights. This gives rise increasingly to the operational question of how central to our foreign policy should be the active promotion of democratic systems?
This important shift in emphasis from the individual to systems more broadly reflects the burst of historical optimism produced by the fall of communism. I need merely remind you, for example, of the writings symptomatic of this historical optimism: Samuel Huntington on the "Third Wave," where he speaks about the spread of democracy around the world; or Francis Fukuyama's controversial article on the "End of History." In both cases, democracy is now seen both as a right and as historically pervasive.
Beyond the obvious argument that democracy respects human rights—and thus institutionalizes respect for the individual—the case for the active promotion of democracy rests also on the proposition that democracies tend to be less warlike. Thus, the reinforcement of democracy as a system is seen as a direct contribution to global peace.
Nonetheless, here too the old dilemmas persist. Should the institutionalization of democracy be the central goal of our relations with Russia and China? To what extent is the proliferation of democracy America's central goal in the world? To some extent, this is what we profess and practice. For example, Congress mandates and finances the National Endowment for Democracy, an institution committed to the active propagation and support of democratic systems around the world.
But some might argue—and do argue—that the central objective of American policy in the world ought to be the promotion of stability, and that under certain conditions, even the denial of national freedom and self-determination is justified by the overriding interest in stability. This argument, for example, has come up in the course of the Russian suppression of Chechnya.
Lately, some of these objections to the "enlargement of democracy"—the term used by the Clinton administration to define the goals of U.S. foreign policy—have been fed by some waning in optimism regarding the democratic momentum worldwide. There is now some uncertainty as to whether in fact democracy is a genuinely valid universal prescription—that perhaps it is a reflection of the West's own dogmatic parochialism.
I have in mind when I say this the recent emergence of various Asian critiques of our emphasis on democracy and human rights. I have in mind the arguments made by Lee Kwan Yew and Mahathir to the effect that the West, in its propagation of the enlargement of democracy, is parochial, self-indulgent, and even hypocritical, and that collective social values based on harmony, authority, and social cohesion transcend in value the Western emphasis on a democratic structure that rests on the primacy of the individual and elevates the individual into the central focus of political and social responsibility.
At a time of considerable philosophical ambiguity, the above counterargument could become a significant challenge to our propagation of democracy, even if one does not fully subscribe to the more apocalyptic visions of the coming clash of civilizations, most notably between the West and Asia.
Although far from being resolved, the foregoing dilemmas of human rights pale in complexity in the face of the now-emerging third new dimension of human rights. If it can be said that the first two dimensions, the protection of individual liberty and the spread of democracy, pertained to the centrality of human individuality in the world of politics and to the social institutionalization of the idea of freedom—namely, democracy—the emerging third dimension pertains to the rapidly growing potential for the actual alteration of human individuality and for the inequitable social exploitation of that potential. This is the third new dimension of human rights, and it goes far beyond the complicated interface between politics and ethics where the first two reside. Now the emerging interface is among politics, ethics, and science.
Today, some 150 years after the onset of the industrial revolution, a new scientific revolution is well underway. Explosive discoveries compress centuries into decades, decades into years, and the pace is accelerating. The scientific revolution is generating consequences that will be far more challenging than those unleashed by the industrial revolution, and it could pose challenges that we are not yet capable of fully comprehending.
On the political plane, today's scientific revolution is creating the temptation and the capacity for going beyond this century's earlier temptation, stimulated by the industrial revolution, to engage in total social engineering—a temptation so abused by the totalitarian phenomenon. Through today's scientific revolution the temptation to engineer society is giving way to a temptation to engineer the human person.
Inherent in this temptation is a great promise and a great danger. The promise is that of a longer, healthier, and perhaps even more fulfilling life in which both mentally and physically human beings will be less vulnerable to the ravages of disease and the painful afflictions of old age. Humanity already owes an enormous debt to science for the advances that have made such a promise possible.
But we have to be alert to a hidden, mystifying, philosophically challenging danger inherent in this otherwise benign promise: that of the eventual dehumanization and destruction of the authentic uniqueness of each person, of the stripping away of the transcendental mystery inherent in human consciousness, and of the eventual transformation of the human being into something that can be described as a mechanistic entity, subject to cloning, transplants, contrived improvements in external appearance, induced changes in psyche and personality, and even to deliberate enhancements of intelligence. This power to alter, to improve, and even eventually to artificially produce the human being, carries with it the risk of the loss of reverence for the sanctity of an individually unique identity.
In the West we have already lost faith in what has been called by some "the anthropocentric universe," the idea that the earth is at the center of the universe. Fading with this Judeo-Christian idea is also the conviction that there exists a shared natural moral law of universal validity. Modern Western society increasingly subscribes to only one absolute: that there are no absolutes, that everything is relative.
And now science poses an even more momentous challenge: that the human being can be reduced, maybe even reproduced, into a semi-artificial and thus a potentially dehumanized product. That prospect involves a giant leap beyond the totalitarian design to create coercive utopias and even beyond the acquisition just several decades ago of the capacity to destroy mankind through nuclear fission. We may now be reaching the capacity to deprive ourselves of our individually and mysteriously unique and authentic humanness.
All of this points to an urgent question that goes beyond the old issue of what exactly is the critical difference between human and animal life, an issue that has perplexed humankind for many centuries. Now the question increasingly becomes: What is the critical difference between human and artificial intelligence? How do we define that difference? How do we defend that difference? And, perhaps for some who are scientific materialists, is the difference worth defending?
These are the issues that are likely to become, and in some respects already are becoming, the central cutting-edge foci of politics in the most advanced societies. In addition to ideological conflicts over the feasibility of a secular utopia, as was the case with the very recent past, or debates over human rights between the advanced democracies and nondemocratic states, ethical conflicts over the definition of the human being will increasingly dominate our political life. This phenomenon is already breeding a strong reaction that we see in its extreme form in religious extremism.
In that broad connection, perhaps the most difficult dilemma facing advanced societies will be how to define the boundary between private decisions and public regulations regarding the exploitation of the new powers acquired because of the ongoing scientific revolution. What, indeed, is uniquely private and what is public in consequence and import? It will be very difficult to reach consensus on these matters in a democratic society. Indeed, already a variety of views are beginning to clash very sharply, and the severity of such clashes is likely to be intensified by the fact that our own society is increasingly agnostic, not just religiously but ethically as well. There is no longer any pervasive, dominant, unifying sense of ethics in our own society. Increasingly we tend to define as unethical only that which has first been proven to be illegal. A very good example of this on a pedestrian, trivial level is the Tonya Harding case. You might remember her as the skater whom the American Olympic Committee would not throw off the Olympic team—membership on which is not a civic right but a privilege and an honor to be earned—on the grounds that she had not been convicted of a crime. This is a classic example of the reduction of an ethical judgment to a legal judgment—or rather the dependence of the former on the latter. This condition, I think, is inimical to any consensus on the larger issues that are likely to confront us.
Worse than that, one may even have to ask whether a society that in some respects appears to be self-indulgent, morally relativistic, and rather hedonistic—a society in which television is replacing the family, the school, and the church as the source of values—can in fact intelligently and effectively address these issues. Can our society, which is increasingly a trivialized society preoccupied with self-entertainment and bereft of a collectively shared spiritual intuition of earlier generations, reach a consensus on these issues?
The absence of ethical consensus and the weakness of ethical convictions is compounded by our limited grasp on the public level of the actual implications of the scientific breakthroughs that are now underway and are increasingly galloping forward in genetics, biology, neurology, chemistry, and in medicine more generally. Do we understand what is actually involved here? The fact is, our society at large simply lacks knowledge of what is in store for all of us just around the corner and regarding which we will have to make fundamental decisions.
In that context we are going to face some excruciating political choices. Is it better for an ethically divided, or at least agnostic, and scientifically rather ignorant society—namely, our own—to abdicate making choices in these domains regarding what kind of scientific tampering with a human being is permissible, in which case scientific alteration of the human being in the name of its enhancement will become rampant? Or is it better for all of us to make partially informed public choices, which also means partially uninformed public choices, thereby risking a breakdown on social consensus, and perhaps also the making of ethically or scientifically erroneous decisions? Which is better?
In the most extreme form, this poses the choice between abdication of responsibility in the first instance and arbitrary regimentation in the second. We should bear in mind that in abdicating responsibility and letting science move on its own momentum, we may lose the option to make future choices. In the second instance—that of an arbitrary and, probably, partially uneducated decision—we may simply make the wrong choice because public debate is likely to be acrimonious and demagogic, and public decisions may even be fundamentally wrong.
Ethical conflicts, precisely because they are so contingent and because they will be occurring in a setting of unrefined ethical awareness and limited scientific understanding, are thus likely to become very divisive. We already see the beginnings of this in the ongoing debate in our own society about abortion. We see it in the debate over euthanasia. And only a step away is the debate over whether the individual personal right to reproduce should be socially controlled—as it is becoming already in different ways in Singapore and China—and, if so, on the basis of what criteria—political, philosophical, ethical, or scientific?
All of the foregoing quite evidently implies the need both for enhanced ethical consciousness in our own society and for the wider dissemination of scientific knowledge that bears on the personal and social dimensions of our changing life. The decline in religion should not mean the fading of ethical norms that help to define what a community is, over and beyond the matter of legality. Our modern society risks ultimate dissolution if even a minimal ethical consensus ceases to exist.
It follows, therefore, that we need to foster, especially in our education but also in our mass media, a higher concern for the deliberate definition of shared ethical norms, for a deeper and more informed and, perhaps, instinctive, social discernment of the difference between what is "right" and what is "wrong." We must have the courage to reiterate and reassert the centrality of ethics in social life—through education particularly and in some special and unique cases perhaps through legislation—thereby enhancing the ethical content both of private and public decisions.
Aggravating the above philosophic-political dilemmas are their international geopolitical implications, In just one century we have traversed from the coercive utopia of the totalitarians, through the permissive cornucopia of our current consumption-oriented and morally relativistic democracies, to the gates of the scientifically self-perfecting genomia. We must face the fact that this progression and development of the centrality of science is costly in simple financial terms. Its benefits can be enormous, but they can also be very discriminatory. If we can prolong life, improve its personal quality, enhance our own intelligence, increase our physical stature, gratify our social notions of personal beauty, and reduce the ravages of disease, will the benefits of these new and very costly capabilities—even assuming we handle responsibly the pertinent ethical dilemmas—be available to all of humanity? Clearly the answer has to be no. The "benefits" of science in the first instance will flow much more to the rich in the advanced societies and much less to the poor, much more to the advanced societies in general and much less to the two-thirds of mankind living in the less developed and poorer countries. As a trivial example, let me ask the following simple question: Do you know any poor person who has had cosmetic surgery?
Discrimination and selectivity will enhance the already existing inequalities in the human condition and will breed new and extraordinarily intense resentments. The differences that already exist between the rich and poor could widen into a shocking and morally unacceptable gap between an elite of self-upgrading superbeings and a resentful majority of mankind.
That most extreme prospect must simply be avoided. A world dominated by a few countries inhabited by a minority of superbeings would not only be fundamentally immoral but also explosive. It would be a world dominated by Marxist class divisions, blended with Hitlerite notions of genetic superiority. The once-defeated, recently defeated utopian notions, in an appalling act of historical vengeance, could even be resurrected. In any case, it would be a fundamentally unstable world, bound to precipitate a violent global reaction, of which the current manifestations of fundamentalism and extremism are but a preview.
That my expression of concern is not unduly alarmist is suggested by the letter to Science magazine from S. E. Luria, the Nobel laureate in biology from MIT, who warns against the gathering momentum in eugenic intervention by asking: "Will the Nazi program to eradicate Jewish or otherwise 'inferior' genes by mass murder be transformed into a kinder, gentler program to 'perfect' human individuals by 'correcting' their genomes in conformity, perhaps, to an ideal, 'white, Judeo-Christian, economically successful' genotype?"
Avoiding that prospect will require difficult, and at best only partially informed, political choices regarding the dissemination internationally of the presumed benefits of using the enhanced powers of science to improve and alter the human being. This is bound to be an even more complicated issue, magnifying our approaching domestic dilemmas. The ongoing controversy over population growth and population control is but an early indicator of the growing salience of the interaction of scientific, ethical, and political issues.
My reflections point to a fundamental conclusion: Our contemporary politics is on the threshold of a new age. At one stage in the past, politics was driven by religious fervor as mankind tried to define its place in the universe. More recently it has been driven by ideological dogmas as mankind has tried to shape a heaven on earth for itself. Increasingly, politics is likely to be dominated by ethical dilemmas stimulated by science's potential for reshaping the very nature of the human being itself, thereby also placing on our agenda the ultimate question as to what, indeed, is the human being.
In that context, the benefits of science must not be trivialized by self-gratification either at home or abroad. Accelerating scientific knowledge has to be matched by a deepening ethical consensus and by more scientifically informed and carefidly considered political decisions. The interface between ethics and science will hence be the new frontier of politics—the third new dimension of human rights—and that places on the shoulders of democratic leaders, and ultimately on all of us concerned with human rights, the obligation to be at least part-time scientists and philosophers. It may be too much to ask, but ask we must.
Q You indicated that the foundation of world problems is a conception of human nature and that the solution is a philosophical one. Do you have any suggestions about what conception we might work toward developing and how we are going to educate people with the philosophical understanding to implement it?
A While I would rather keep to myself my own notions of what I consider the human being to be, I do believe we should attach a very high value to the uniqueness, to the spiritual mystery, of human consciousness. This is something that should not be unraveled and reduced to a mechanistic process in which not only that mystery ends but which permits, in effect, a mechanical reproduction of human beings who would essentially be processors rather than mysteriously living entities with a sense of values that determine their conduct and their relationships with others. There is something sacredly mysterious about that concept of a human being.
If the world ends, I don't think it will be because of some sort of strange explosion. It will end if we somehow unravel, demystify, and mechanize that strange condition that is what we are and that defines us in the totally unique individual sense, in spite of the fact that there are billions of us.
Q Regarding the second new dimension of human rights, the furtherance of democracy, it seems a very weak thing for us to base our hopes and aspirations on. A stark example is what happened in Yugoslavia, where, with the fall of communism, the country splintered into democratic states ruled by freely elected tyrants. The result has been one of the most tragic episodes in history. Even with ethnic cleansing, rape, pillage, and other horrendous acts occurring there, they are democratic states. So I don't think democracy is the panacea for the troubles that are besetting mankind.
A It may be true that some of the states elected nondemocratic despots, but the alternative to that might be nonelected nondemocratic despots, which is not necessarily better. Not all despots are enlightened and not all despots pursue policies that are responsible.
The problem in Yugoslavia is not due to the fact that it became a series of democracies. The problem in Yugoslavia is that it was a multinational state that pretended to be a national state, but with a nonexistent nationality defining it. The only people that were Yugoslavs in Yugoslavia were the people living in Belgrade and working for the Yugoslav government. Everybody else was either a Slovene, a Croat, a Serb, or a Bosnian, each with a sense of his own distinctive history and separate identity. Yugoslavia was maintained artificially by force for too long, which means a lot of the sentiments were suppressed. The West only served to delay its transformation, thereby unintentionally contributing to an explosion that became increasingly irrational and violent—not driven by democratic passions but by ethnic passions.
Democracy is not a panacea. Instead, it is possible that in many parts of the world, and for quite some time to come, we will see periods of prolonged transition whereby some form of authoritarianism will prevail in order either to control ethnic passions or to create national stability, and we're going to find ourselves supporting them. For example, some of the new Central Asian countries in the former Soviet Union cannot instantaneously become democracies. Saudi Arabia certainly is not a democracy, and we support Saudi Arabia. South Korea was not a democracy for a long time while we were supporting it, but it has evolved into a democracy.
So our task is to facilitate, to the extent that it is practicable and not inconsistent with other important geostrategic objectives, the evolution of democratic systems. No, democracy is not a panacea. But some of the problems besetting these countries, particularly in Yugoslavia, are not rooted in democracy; they are rooted in ethnicity and nationalism.
Q Dr. Brzezinski, as you described the dehumanization and mechanization of mankind today, I was reminded of an earlier time when I read Aldous Huxley's Brave New World. The horror it invoked then was revived again as you spoke. One antidote, you suggest, might be the development of ethical awareness through the media and through education. We Americans seem to be indifferent as we practice our hedonism, to such an extent that many of us don't even know what the implications of this new tax cut are, what the "Contract with America" is, or to what extent Newt Gingrich will be a savior.
Who do you see initiating this educational process and this ethical awareness that will in some way revive a sense of responsibility in order that we might be able to extricate ourselves from our complacency?
A The answer, very briefly, is you—that is to say, you individually and you collectively. This is the only way we can respond to that problem in our society. There is no other way. I don't look for a savior to come who will lead us to the Promised Land. I think we have to be concerned about these issues. And it is very important that we all understand what they are. We are becoming in extremely rapid fashion the most trivialized society in the world. We may be the richest, the most democratic, the most innovative, and the most successful nation in the world, but we are rapidly also becoming one of the more stupid.
There is much more wisdom among residents of a small village in a Third World country than there is among Americans obsessed with the "boob tube." The average American woman watches television 28 hours a week. Just think of that. And what does she see? The average American child watches between 14 and 18 hours of television a week, which I'm sure is much more than what he or she spends reading or studying.
Look at the morning shows that go on for hour after hour after hour with titillating perversity from the mass media pornographers, who have programs with their names on them as a way of personalizing their strange social role. This is what most Americans are fed.
Other societies are rapidly emulating us, so it is not a peculiarly American phenomenon. It's a modern phenomenon. And it's a very serious phenomenon. Little time is spent addressing or thinking about anything but virtual reality, of which all of that is a part. Increasingly our society is living in virtual reality. These discussions, these talk shows, the so-called serials, or events like the O. J. Simpson trial, which preoccupy the public, are an escape from reality. Escape from reality is virtual reality, and that's where we're heading. At the same time, the scientific revolution is plunging us into a new age, but without any guidelines, because we are no longer thinking about what are the important distinctions we will need to make in order to impose some degree of control over these processes.
This is in part why I titled my most recent book Out of Control. My concern was that this is not only a philosophical issue, but very much a geostrategic issue as well. If we don't have the basic criteria of choice, we will not be able to guide the world, even politically.
Zbigniew Brzezinski National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter, 1977-1981View Bio
Joel H. Rosenthal President, Carnegie CouncilView Bio
The New Dimensions of Human Rights (pdf | 1.07 MB)
Annual Morgenthau Memorial Lecture Series (1981-2006)Democracy Ethics Human Rights
The Choice: Global Domination or Global LeadershipZbigniew Brzezinski, Joanne J. Myers
Bioethical Debates on Human EnhancementArthur Caplan, Julian Savulescu, Leonard Lopate
Ethics Matter: A Conversation on Bioethics with NASA's Paul Root WolpePaul Root Wolpe, Marlene Spoerri


U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., joined with two Senate conservatives on Wednesday to back a proposal reforming Social Security disability benefits.
Noting that disability benefits are consuming more Social Security funds, Rubio and U.S. Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, are co-sponsoring U.S. Sen. Tom Cotton's, R-Ark., "Return to Work Act" which places new applicants who qualify for Social Security disability benefits in four groups based on whether medical improvement is expected, likely, possible or not expected.
Beneficiaries in the first three groups would be given a timeline to receive disability benefits while those who are not expected to recover would not. If beneficiaries in the first three groups have not recovered at the end of their timelines--two years for those deemed expected to recover, five years for those deemed likely to recover, longer for those whose recovery is possible--they will be able to reapply for disability benefits.
The senators noted a sharp rise in the costs of Social Security's Disability Insurance programs moving from "$20 to $137 billion (in 2012 dollars) since 1970" while fewer Americans in the programs have returned to work. In 1970, less than 1.5 million Americans were beneficiaries while currently there are almost 9 million beneficiaries. Despite more Americans enrolled in the program, fewer are returning to work. While almost 6 percent of Americans using those programs in 1982 returned to work, now it is less than one half of one percent.
Rubio made his case for why the bill was needed, insisting there have been many problems with the programs in recent years.
Cotton's fellow Arkansas Republican U.S. Rep. French Hill brought out the House version of the bill.
No. They can get jobs. Look at Helen Keller, she was blind, deaf and dumb and she did alright. Look at Stephen Hawking, he is a complete paraplegic and he is a great scientist.
Also, under the Mental Disorders: Narcissism (being a jerk) and Antisocial Personality Disorder (being a criminal jerk) are grounds for free handouts. It happens, and it is BS.
I know a lady whose life ambition was to go on SSDI. Every year she'd call her mother (who is also on disability) and say, "X quarters left to go!" She applied for SSDI several times over several years, using a different diagnosis every time, before she was approved for Depression. She worked the bare minimum hours at the bare minimum wages to qualify, getting all the EIC, SNAP, Medicaid, Energy Assistance benefits along the way, while also embezzling money and merchandise from her employers, and frequently changing jobs due to poor attendance and theft. Since she earned the bare minimum, she does get the bare minimum SSDI benefit, but she knew she'd automatically qualify for all kinds of additional goodies. SSI, Section 8 Housing, SNAP, Medicaid, Energy Assistance, Free Cellphone. Most people wouldn't have time to invest in a scam like this, and couldn't afford to live or her income, but she is being supported by her boyfriend. She provides free childcare for his children, pays half the rent, and they share her benefits. Depression is curable, but she isn't required to get treatment because "Possible Justifications for Failing to Follow Treatment: You have a mental illness, and failure to follow treatment is a symptom of the disease." So she went on disability for life at the age of 35 and will collect far more than she paid in, and she is not accountable for anything.
Who will make the final determination as the rehab prospects of the disabled worker?
Great idea! Too many healthy frauds around. Rename SSDI to Common Welfare or reform it! it is shame to see what is going on. Yes, the frauds will fight hard (and their lawyers) for Welfare benefits from SSDI. They will try to shame anyone who raise the fraud concern in SSDI which massive. They will say that there are too many people with invisible disabilities. i would say too many with non-existing. I think that TRULY disabled must be in the first raw for SSDI reforms and restriction eliminating "life-long" expired disabilities for the majorities. True sick people will always have a chance to be re-qualified for benefits under any new laws, but frauds afraid losing their benefits.
Just remember that many of these increased numbers include hundreds of thousands of returning Veterans from several wars! Veterans who came back home not only physically injured, but psychology destroyed. The Vietnam era Vets never even got the help they truly needed and in subsequent wars, the gov't is barely doing much better addressing PTSD. So before you start throwing around a blanket term like 'fraud' why don't you do some research on the subject and the numbers. There are young men and women suffering in this country in record numbers from mental illness that are not in treatment and need, deserve our help! To make matters worse, if Republicans get their wish, mental health and drug addiction (another problem for our recovering Vets) will be stripped from Healthcare. Then where will our Veterans be? Homeless Frauds I guess?! It must be nice to be healthy, able to work and stand in harsh judgment of your fellow man.
The Trump budget increases the Veterans Administration budget so it's not nearly as heartless as people think. The way it is now a veteran can get both social security disability and VA benefits. Often if they are applying for social security disability they have alrrady been approved at 100% at the VA. So they would be double dipping if approved.
yes, i do not see a problem if "PTSD" drug addicts will become homeless. i think the Government should provide more support for "healthy" minimal wages low income people who ARE Working rather than "treating" their PTSD with drugs.
Go ahead Republicans we knew you were going down this path screw up disability just remember a couple of things you yourself can become disabled in a new york second bam stroke. That would cure your mindset quickly. I have a fix for the ss system get all of you republicans to give up your social security and medicare benifits. you hate the system but collect anyway such hypocrits,give it hell you have been waiting for this for a long time just remember there is a midterm election in two years and a presidential election in 4 years and anything you do will be quickly reversed just as it was after reagan.
having parkinsons which is a progressive debilitating disease will never get better. I had long term disability insurance from my job with Cigna. within 1 yr I got a letter telling me that I was no longer disabled according to their requirements. So according to them I was the first person in history to recover from parkinsons. I now have to take 3 pills every 3 hours to be able to even function enough to move about my home. So you can not even guess as to what this bill will consider parkinsons as being disabling. paid into SS over 40 yrs and have to worry each month weather or not some bill or threat of closing the government down because of posturing will put me on the streets without my medications.
It's about time that something was do to reduce the fraud used to receive Social Security Disability Benefits. It's also way past time to reduce the fraud used to receive welfare benefits and under both SSD and welfare, excuses not to find employment should never determine access to benefits.
I can see why you chose to only be "Anonymous" you coward. Go take your poor-hating trash talk back to WND or Infowars.
The SSA has three categories for CDR diary. Medical improvement Expected, Medical Improvement Possible, and Medical Improvement Not Expected. The only one who doesn't have to go to vocational rehabilitation is the MINE. The DDS medical consultant can recommend everyone else to vocational rehabilitation. While they wait for their appeal for a hearing, they must go to vocational rehabilitation. The ALJ could deny them for not going to vocational rehabilitation unless they prove that their case is classified as MINE.
I don't see how this would be a bad thing. Vocational Rehabilitation Counselors are trained to assist individuals with disabilities in obtaining employment opportunities that are within their limitations. If someone is truly able to work despite their disability - with accommodations in place - or able to recover, the VRC would likely be able to assist them in finding meaningful employment. And if they truly are too disabled to benefit from VR services or do any kind of competitive employment, this would be apparent in the VRC's reports. There are many people who, once awarded SSI or SSDI, are terrified to even attempt to go to work out of fear of losing their benefits, even though there are safeguards in place through the Ticket to Work and income allowances for many to work part time and still keep some benefits. A graduated system would hopefully address this pool of recipients who might well be able to work but have become reliant on a guaranteed income - even though it is at the poverty level.
You want to kick them off due to vocational rehabilitation. They can't ever get back on the disability roll because they have to go to vocational rehabilitation and back to work. If they reapply, then they will be technically denied for not going to vocational rehabilitation. People say the congressmen's idea is very stupid. If you make over a million people reapply each year, then you will have over a million cases added to the backlog cases each year. In three years the SSA would have over 5 million backlog cases.
One of the reasons that the numbers on SS disability have gone up is that Obama people hosted picnics across the country where they fed people and gave them instruction on how to get on the disability rolls...literally recruiting people for the disability program!
Wow! THAT'S a new BS lie if I ever heard one. Got any proof (from a LEGIT news site. No WND/Infowars tabloid trash) to back up your accusation?
"A Disability Determination Services (DDS) staff physician is not a treating source. Similarly, a physician whose only relationship to the claimant is as a consulting examiner may not be considered a treating source. Therefore, where a consulting examiner's finds establish severity and for the first time indicate that specific treatment can be expected to restore ability to engage in any SGA (or gainful activity, as appropriate), the case should not be denied for failure to follow prescribed treatment. The DDS will refer such cases to the vocational rehabilitation (VR) agency for further action."(SSR 82-59 Failure to Follow Prescribed Treatment) Just have the DDS consultant examiner recommend vocational rehabilitation and refer them to vocational rehabilitation. They refuse to go to vocational rehabilitation without good cause, then it is a failure to follow prescribed treatment which is a Group II exception and they are automatically kicked off disability.
Visit a S.S. office and check the ages of the people applying.
So? What are you implying?
Want to know how I know you've never been on Disability, or Medicare/Medicaid?
And what is your alternative for the disabled? Let them rot in the street & starve?


Pending Chain of Responsibility (CoR) regulation changes are a useful trigger for thinking about your organisation's HR policies.
CoR changes are further tightening an employer's responsibility to ensure the safety of any employee driving a vehicle as part of their employment.
Are your HR policies up-to-date when it comes to your employee mobility practices? Do they cover all the requisite regulations and laws? Are your policies frequently reviewed and updated (if necessary) to include the latest safety standards? And do your organisation's HR guidelines meet with employee expectations?
Fatigue management is one of many considerations when it comes to keeping employees safe when they are driving. In recent times, the use of telematic devices to monitor driver safety has increased in popularity with fleet and HR managers but, while telematics has helped to stimulate improved productivity and reduced downtime, there's a number of important considerations that come along with the use of such technology, including issues around privacy and data security.
What do we mean by telematics?
Telematics involves use of hardware and software in vehicles to allow you to collect data. Using GPS and accelerometers, it tracks vehicle location and records vehicle performance and driver behaviour.
When it comes to vehicle fleets or your employees' cars, telematics provides managers with some valuable information that can greatly enhance driver safety.
For example, telematics can show when a driver speeds, whether they are too heavy or late on their braking (which, ultimately, leads to unnecessary wear on brakes), 'diving' too hard into corners (suspension risks), accelerating too rapidly (fuel consumption) and a range of other driving behaviours that, if left unchecked, could lead to avoidable cost blowouts or, in a worst-case scenario, something fatal.
The technology behind telematics has the capacity to alert you not just for when the vehicle is due for scheduled servicing but for other maintenance issues that might require more immediate attention but often go unnoticed until they develop into a bigger problem. The savings to your business are obvious but telematics can also be an essential element in providing a safe workplace and minimising issues around vehicle maintenance and safety.
Telematics can also ensure that driver fatigue is managed effectively. In larger vehicles, vehicle weights, dimensions and distance travelled from home-base dictate legally mandated rest-breaks. Drivers in passenger cars can also be adversely impacted by fatigue. The data that accumulates from your telematics can provide a picture of whether your drivers, as a whole or individually, tend to spend too long on the road, or skip breaks.
If it's an across-the-board trend and you don't already have breaks in place, it may be time to implement policies on mandatory rest-times and champion a culture that strikes a better balance between productivity and driver fatigue. If the problem is more with the individual, then it's a great opportunity to sit down one-on-one with the employee and not just remind them of the importance of reducing fatigue.
Another way in which telematics can ensure you meet your employee safety obligations is scheduling. Telematics technology is a handy way to provide drivers and schedulers with realistic delivery timeframes that reduce the temptation to speed or drive in a less than safe manner.
With telematics, schedulers can take a more proactive role managing driver workloads to combat fatigue while adequately managing customer expectations.
While the positives of telematics are many, there are some very important aspects of the technology that needs to be properly managed – privacy and data security are two that sit front and centre.
Many fleet vehicles are available to staff for both business and private use, and there would be few employees happy knowing that their weekend away with family – and the data being collected from a visit to a winery or a pub for lunch – was being shared with their workplace.
In Europe, the EU's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which came into force in May 2018, provides some serious consequences for businesses when it comes to the collection and storage of telemetric data. As Jonathan Manning wrote for FleetEurope.com, apart from some onerous penalties for companies that misuse employee data, the new GDPR laws also spell out clearly the rights of employees and private individuals to "explore how their data is stored." With protections of this kind not yet active in Australia, companies will need to pay particular attention to the way in which the data they collect and store is not just managed but is potentially accessed by the individuals concerned.
Telematics may be a handy tool for improving productivity and a useful weapon when it comes to managing CoR but, when pursuing telematics, it's important that your organisation has the policies and infrastructure to fully protect that data.


When Levi was only a few months old, I had a lot of tension on if we should offer him a pacifier. Early on I had the conviction that he didn't really need one. It seemed strange to me to shove a piece of plastic in his mouth so repeatedly that he'd one day need it so that later I'd have to break him of this. He would never know they even existed if I never introduced him to them in the first place - so I didn't.
There were times it seemed like this was an unwise decision. Friends would listen to him crying and watch my soothing efforts and ask why I didn't just give him a pacie. We aren't using those I tried to explain. They must of thought I was crazy.
But over time, Levi learned to sooth himself without one, most times by simply sucking his fingers. This is really convenient for me as I don't have to keep up with a pacie, keep it clean, or repeatedly give it to him.
Turns out pacifiers are optional, not essential for raising babies. Have you ever considered not using one?


text:
Health, Relationships Tracy Moore April 12, 2018
Can You Give Your Kid CBD?
Short answer: It's complicated
There's weed to get you high, and weed to treat hardcore pain or nausea, but there's also a third category of weed usage we're only just beginning to understand: self-medicating by people who don't want to get high and who are otherwise "healthy," but who want to manage low-key pain, anxiety or insomnia. Or just relax.
It's the weed porridge that Goldilocks would use — not too hot, not too cold. We're talking about CBD or cannabidiol, a weed compound that can be ingested orally, applied topically or sublingually, or vaped. And given that a lot of adult people now evangelize for the pain-relieving chill effects of CBD products, it's only natural to ask:
Can you give this stuff to a kid? Let's figure this out!
First, the adults: A piece at the Washington Post calls CBD the new "it" drug for "Generation Anxious," a new salve for the stressed-out office worker that, because it lacks the actual trippy high, but cools everything down to a functional, focused, side-effect free, manageable chill, is a big disappointment to actual stoners. And a lot of regular non-stoner people swear by it. Lavanya Ramanathan writes:
Devotees whisper about CBD as a soothing remedy for racing thoughts and aching extremities. CBD for those restless nights. Also, somehow, CBD for those listless mornings.
Suddenly, you can find sugarcoated CBD gummies to gnaw on, and balms to rub onto pulse points. There's CBD for your dog (gluten-free and pumpkin-flavored!) and CBD for your aching feet. You can buy bottled CBD water in trendy, seasonally driven fast-casual restaurants, and bags of CBD-laced coffee in shops on busy thoroughfares in Washington, Colorado Springs, Las Vegas and dozens of other cities.
Elsewhere, adults say they are replacing over-the-counter pain relievers, anti-inflammatories, and antidepressants with CBD, and opting out of the liver-shredding side effects of those drugs. A recent debate on Reddit wonders whether CBD is ultimately better and safer than aspirin (a scientist made this claim in 2000). It's increasingly being used by athletes for pain and inflammation, and the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) just removed CBD from its list of banned substances.
Okay, but what about children? Though Ramanthan doesn't address CBD use for kids in the WaPo piece, a quick search for whether or not it's safe for kids turns up a number of queries by parents who wonder if it's not a better, safer, more natural pain reliever for anxiety, pain or hyperactivity for their spawn. A post this month on POPSUGAR claims that giving your kid CBD oil "could be the answer to some of their biggest struggles," claiming it can help them with anxiety or sleep issues. Other sites document successful experiments in treating ADHD in children with CBD oil.
Most of the excitement in treating kids with CBD for a variety of ailments comes from the success story of Charlotte Figi, a 5-year-old with Dravet Syndrome who experienced multiple daily seizures, who only found relief from both the seizures and the heavy side effects of pharmaceuticals after two doctors were willing to give her CBD oil. Other children with similar issues have also reported success managing otherwise untreatable seizures. It has been studied and found effective in treating pediatric anxiety and/or insomnia related to PTSD. It has been studied and found to have a "favorable safety profile" with regard to side effects. (Compare this to the side effects of children's ibuprofen even.)
A professor of pharmacy tells Ramanathan at the Post that there are the two aforementioned reputable studies on CBD in effectively relieving seizures, but all the other stuff, like treating anxiety or insomnia, simply doesn't have the scientific backing or rigor to trust it. Plus — and this is a critical point — without government regulation to supervise dosage and ingredients, it's difficult to know what you're getting. (Here is a High Times guide to finding high-quality CBD oil.)
In a piece at the Phoenix New Times looking at the CBD oil boom, they put the overarching issues on CBD like this:
Not only is its legality uncertain, but so is the proper dosage. Questions remain whether it should be combined with THC or other cannabinoids, what originating cannabis strains are best, whether adding terpenes (aromatic oils) is beneficial, or what ailments it's best used to treat. Sometimes it even may be unclear whether a product has any CBD in it all, or whether it contains contaminates. Unlike, say, aspirin or ibuprofen, CBD seems to work differently in different people. In other words, not everybody can expect positive results.
CBD doesn't get people stoned and has the same, safe reputation as marijuana in general — as in, nobody's ever died from taking too much of it. In fact, it's said to take the edge off a THC high, and lessen any sensation of paranoia. But CBD may occasionally produce side effects. Some studies suggest that CBD may cause cottonmouth, drowsiness, or even vomiting and diarrhea in sensitive people. Other studies show it's probably more likely to reduce nausea and other problems than cause them.
And while, again, there are success stories for those extreme situations (like kids who have 100 epileptic seizures a day), just dosing your kid with a CBD gummy to calm them down or help them sleep, when you aren't sure of the maker of the stuff, the ingredients, the side effects, or the legal ramifications, is too risky.
And about that legality: The makers of CBD and its enthusiasts argue that hemp-derived CBD is allegedly legal because it contains none or little THC; marijuana-derived CBD is legal in the states where it's authorized. The DEA says this is "creative interpretation" of the law and that CBD is illegal and still a schedule 1 drug because even trace amounts of THC mean it qualifies.
In other words, you wouldn't need to be smoking anything to be confused about all this. Add to this that some parents have dealt with Child Protective Services nightmares in even extreme seizure cases and that's reason enough to give you pause. (To say nothing of the added confusion of instances of kids accidentally ingesting actual THC-laced foods or the fact that there's now a synthetic form of marijuana that makes people literally bleed out their eyes.)
For now, unless you're a smart, cautious, concerned parent with a very sick child willing to do the research and take the risk — and definitely loop in your doctor about all this — it's probably best if adults stick to the experimenting with CBD oil until we have better information about how it might impact children.
So let's recap: This pain reliever that doesn't actually fuck you up and has very few side effects works great for some people, for some things, and great for some children, for some things. For kids, the only real research is about its effectiveness in treating seizures. Some people love it; for others it does very little.
The fact that this sounds as good as or better than most established household drugs you already take is reason why we should at least demand more research. Or if nothing else, hope that the legalization wave everyone is now jumping on is going to bode well for the rest of us, including our pets and children.
Health: The Spicy Science Behind Why Pepper Makes You Feel Less High
Dicks: Is It Normal to Ejaculate During a Prostate Exam?
Health: Masturbating Through the Ages — Do You Stop Jerking Off as Much as You Get Older?
Health: Is Masturbating While Sick Actually Good for You?

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


If the answer is "yes" send your CV to cvtemp@elizabethmichael.co.uk!
If you are looking for an immediate start get In touch with Hannah, Simona or Andy to book your registration today!
If you are looking for an immediate start get In touch with Hannah, Simona or Andy to book your registration today on!
Are you Graduate seeking temporary work whilst you await that first step on to your career ladder!
For those of you who have graduated, or if your graduation is creeping up, a lot of you may be posing the question of where to go next…. Well look no further we are here to help! We have various office based Temporary opportunities that could keep you busy whilst looking for the next step on your preferred career path.
Please only apply for this position if you can evidence, on your CV, the essential elements of the post.
Should this not be the case, you will only receive an automatically generated email response to your application with no further communication.
Our client is seeking to appoint a proactive individual who not only takes pride in the general appearance and upkeep of the office and its supplies, but also possesses the skills or both organise and liaise with clients and staff alike. You will enjoy a multi faceted position, in which you will represent the business and play a pivotal role in the continuing success and coordination of the office!
Sales Administrators - We Want You!
We specialise in Sales Administration and Order Processing positions and want to hear from candidates with this experience! If you're a confident Sales Administrator seeking your next challenge, we would love to hear from you!
Locations throughout Nottinghamshire with salaries ranging form £18,000 - £23,000 per annum!
Hit 'apply' and see how we can help you today!
Are you an experienced Administrator seeking a new opportunity? Immediately available and ready to step into a new challenge?!
We are currently recruiting for several Administrative positions available with immediate starts!
Salaries ranging from £8.00 - £9.00 per hour!
"IT'S A BEAUTIFUL THING WHEN A CAREER AND A PASSION COME TOGETHER"
Do you describe yourself as a people person, someone who loves to connect with others with the ability to communicate in an engaging tone? Do you have administrative experience, are passionate about what you do and the impact your role has on the wider world, however has the time come for a change?
We specialise in administrative positions, and by registering with us and discussing your future plans, we are able to assist you in making your next steps a reality by enabling us to consider you first hand for all new roles! We see vacancies in various locations surrounding Nottingham City Centre, many of which are easily accessible via public transport!
Hit 'apply' and see how we can help you!


Excellent opportunity to join a growing financial software company as a Sr. UI Developer. This is a full time, contract to hire role, located in Portland, OR.
The company takes great pride in the mentorship and development it provides to its junior developers. Senior UI Developers are expected to embrace this role and should exhibit consonant qualities. The ideal candidate will have substantial experience pair-programming, facilitating code and design reviews and participating in technical discussions in a collaborative setting.


Alberto Marino is a graduate in (BSc) Political Economy at King's College London. He is currently working as a part-time social media strategist and research assistant for the Global Biopolitics Research Centre (GBRC), and he will pursue a (MSc) Health Economics at University of York in September. His main areas of interest are in behavioral and experimental economics, health economics, policy and modeling. His undergraduate dissertation was concerned with how the study of economics affects voting behavior, drawing on previous findings in the literature and the use of game theory to set up an original experiment.


Fill in the blanks with come, been, gone.
1. John has .............................. to the market. He will be back in a short while.
Been is used for completed visits. If somebody has gone to a place, they are still there.
2. Have you ever .................................. to Nigeria?
Been is used for completed visits. If you have been to Nigeria, you went there and returned.
3. You cannot meet him now. He has .................................. home.
If he has gone home, he is still at his home.
4. I have ................................... to see them twice since January.
Been is used for completed visits.
5. Where have you ...............................? I've been waiting for an hour.
7. I have never ................................ to Europe.
9. The boy has .................................... missing for a week.
We make the present perfect continuous tense form with been.
10. Where have you ................................... all this while?
11. I haven't .................................... to the cinema for ages.
12. She has .................................. We can start now.
She has come means she is still here.
John has gone to the market. He will be back in a short while.
You cannot meet him now. He has gone home.
I have been to see them twice since January.
Where have you been? I've been waiting for an hour.
Those days have long gone.
The boy has been missing for a week.
I haven't been to the cinema for ages.
She has come. We can start now.


I have only once had the opportunity to see Thousand Foot Krutch live and believe me, I was impressed. The band is incredibly talented and their musical style is perfectly suited for the outdoor party atmosphere at Rocklahoma.
TFK has released 8 studio albums over their twenty years of activity, and Rocklahoma fans are in for a treat as they will get the opportunity to hear some of the new material off their upcoming release Oxygen: Exhale. The new album is a companion, or follow-up, to their 2014 release Oxygen: Inhale.
I have had the opportunity to sample the entire album and I am struggling with sitting still while writing this review. This album has the power of Rage Against the Machine, but with a touch of my favorite band of 2015: Crobot. This band can rock it hard but gives us some of that funky groove that makes a live show so enjoyable.
While TFK members are Christian, their lyrics are in fact are about topics that anyone can relate to. I especially like the opening to "Give up the Ghost" when lead singer Trevor McNevan sings, "I am a rose raised by wolves." If it wasn't for their mom, my daughters could definitely claim that song as their own.
The lyric video to "Give up the Ghost" can be seen below.
The quality of these tracks is repeated consistently on the album. In fact, I feel the best songs on the album are "The River" and "Adrenaline," which show off the best that this talented band can do. While "The River" is one crazy, funky party, "Adrenaline" starts off exactly as the name suggests. Get in, sit down, strap in, and prepare for departure. Either that, or get yourself in the pit and give it your all.
Exhale is scheduled to be released on June 17th, and it is definitely an album to pre-order so you are ready to rock on day one. TFK will be opening the main stage at Rocklahoma this Sunday and you absolutely positively do not want to miss a minute.


Send our "Place In My Heart" Card to your sweetheart to say "I love you!" Share love + motivation with our inspirational greeting cards!
Add a gift with your card! Check out our Coffee Mugs, Makeup Bags & Pen Sets!
Copyright © 2017 Sweet Water Decor, LLC, All Rights Reserved.


text:
Hampton by Hilton opening in Stockton on Tees
The new Hampton by Hilton Stockton on Tees opens 21st February 2019.
Hampton by Hilton Stockton on Tees has 128 bedrooms which are described as 'fresh and modern spaces with a microwave, mini-fridge, 50-inch HDTV, coffeemaker and a work desk with ergonomic chair.' Wi-fi access is free and there are plenty of device-charging spots in the rooms.
Hampton by Hilton Stockton on Tees has a breakfast restaurant but no events space. Leisure facilities include an on-site fully equipped fitness centre.
Hampton by Hilton Stockton on Tees is located on the north bank of the River Tees opposite Teesdale Business Area with good access to the A19, A1 and A66 as well as the north-east coastline and the North York Moors.


text:
Westside Torkel Larson (April 18, 1892 – March 7, 1977) was an American Air Force Major general, who was commandant of the Army Air Forces Antisubmarine Command during World War II. In 1933 he won the Mackay Trophy for his pioneering work with "blind flying" whereby pilots could take off and land an aircraft completely with instruments (without any visual cues outside the plane).

Biography
He was born on April 18, 1892, in Vernalis, California. Larson enlisted in the Aviation Section of the Signal Corps Reserve on Oct. 19, 1917 and underwent his flying training at Park Field, Tennessee. He was commissioned a Second lieutenant on May 18, 1918, and subsequently transferred to the Ellington Field in Texas.

In November, 1921, Larson was transferred to 60th Service Squadron at Kelly Field.

He was a member of the Early Birds, a group of pioneering aviators, and an active member of the Sierra Club.

He died on March 7, 1977, at Hollywood Presbyterian Hospital in Los Angeles, California.

References

1892 births
1977 deaths
People from San Joaquin County, California
United States Army generals
United States Army Air Forces generals
Air Corps Tactical School alumni
United States Army Air Service pilots of World War I
United States Army Air Forces personnel of World War II
Recipients of the Distinguished Service Medal (US Army)

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
Contact the FSF > Members login >
Supporter Liaison Officers
Annual General Meeting (AGM)
© The Football Supporters' Federation 2019
Telephone 0330 44 000 44
Email info@thefsa.org.uk
All Party Parliamentary Group for Football Supporters
European Super League
Away Fans Matter
Fans for Diversity
Free Lionesses
Kick-off times
Twenty's Plenty
Watching Football Is Not A Crime!
Supporter Liaison Officer FAQs
SLO contacts
SLO resources
Disability Access Officers
2018 EGM
Home » News » WINNERS: FSF Awards in association with William Hill
Posted by The FSF 17th December 2013
WINNERS: FSF Awards in association with William Hill
The FSF Awards in association with William Hill took place last night (Monday 16th December) at the Emirates Stadium with hundreds of fans, journalists and club representatives in attendance to salute the best in the football business.
The process began in October when nominations for each category opened – shortlists were announced in November and fans across the country voted on their favourites. Competition was fierce and the quality in each category was extremely high.
Winners of the 2013 FSF Awards in association with William Hill:
Away Day of the Year - Arsenal
Blogger of the Year - Kieron O'Connor (Swiss Ramble)
Commentator of the Year - Martin Tyler
Fanzine of the Year - Stand Against Modern Football (Various/All)
Independent Website of the Year - Arseblog
Newspaper of the Year - The Guardian
Player of the Year - Luis Suarez
Podcast of the Year - Football Weekly
Pundit of the Year - Gary Neville
Writer of the Year - Henry Winter (The Daily Telegraph)
You can see the full list of nominees in each category here.
Gallery of images from the Awards here.
Luis Suarez talks after picking up the Player of the Year award:
Suarez, who attended the event at the Emirates to collect his Player of the Year award, said: "It is a great honour for me to receive such a prestigious award from the fans.
"This award is not just for me but for my team-mates, management and coaching staff, and for everyone connected with Liverpool Football Club. Without them, I would not be the recipient of the award.
"The past 24 hours have been fantastic for me. To captain Liverpool to victory at Tottenham yesterday meant a great deal to me. And now, to be receiving this award, at the Emirates Stadium is another great honour.
"I think it fair to say that the past year has been an eventful one for me.
"Anyone who knows me knows that I love to play football, that is what I enjoy the most. I am delighted that I and my club are finishing the year so strongly and we can look forward to a very successful future.
"I am very honoured that the football fans of England have seen fit to vote me their player of the year for 2013.
"I am very much hoping that 2014 will be a great year for me and Liverpool and, please forgive me when I say this with the World Cup coming up, for Uruguay as well."
Gary Neville scooped the Pundit of the Year prize and the Sky Sports favourite said: "It's a real honour to be awarded the Pundit of the Year award.
"I've always felt that we're here to coach and educate, to pass on our knowledge from all the great managers and coaches I've worked with."
Other winners on the night included Arsenal, who picked up the Away Day of the Year, and Sky Sports' Martin Tyler who picked up the Commentator of the Year award.
The Guardian scored a brace on the night by taking the FSF Newspaper and Podcast awards while Henry Winter took home Writer of the Year.
Kevin Miles, Chief Executive of the FSF, said: "These Awards are by fans, for fans, and really do reward the best that football has to offer – and that recognition couldn't come from a more reputable source than the fans."
Keep up to date by following us on Twitter @The_FSF


 EARLY MORNING MANNA » CONFLICT RESOLUTION: Are You Overcoming the First-Strike Capability of the Enemy?
A few years ago while ministering in Atlanta, GA. I was taken up in the Spirit of God and saw a major offensive being planned against the Body of Messiah from deep within the enemy's camp. It looked like a storm or squall line of dark clouds suddenly rolling in like you would experience in the Summer months on the plains of Oklahoma. The next thing I saw was many believers going about their daily activities totally unaware that this attack was about to hit and that they would also not understand even where this attack was coming from until it was too late and that the damage was done.
(Click here to watch) can attest to the Awe of God that invaded that interview and shofar soundings! (We were subsequently invited to minister at Juanita Bynum's The Threshing Floor camp meeting the at the Georgia Dome with an expected audience of 80,000 plus people!).
Good morning! I'm hoping you remember me. I'm David Waters daughter. My family & I have been living in Nigeria the last 9mos but my daughter & I have just come back to the states for a visit.
I have been inquiring of the Lord concerning some dreams He has given me.
In my dream I was speaking w/ my aunt telling her that we were coming to see them but she said that there was an "impending attack" that was coming in 5mins & everyone was evacuating. I told her we were close to thier house & didnt have time to change course.
We got into the house & seconds later there were black clouds $ smoke engulfing the house. The windows started to shake, there was loud rumbling. I could see people outside running & screaming trying to find safety. I wanted to help but we couldnt open the door without letting the smoke in the house. I remember finding my daughter & covering her to wanting protect her. Then the noise stopped, the attack was over & our house was intact & we were safe inside.
I have had other dreams with rolling smoke & even fire coming from the sky & destrying everything in site but I have never heard phrases like "impending attack" before. As I'm reading this email I'm feeling an urgency to tap into His spirit so I can be faithful to the part He is calling me to play in this hour.
Thank you for you faithfulness in doing what He's called your family to do. I know, from my own experience, it's hard to be away from the modern convienences of western living. But comfort & convience are no match to experiencing His glory in your life.
Thanks again. God bless you & your family!


text:
Choose a language العربية Deutsch English Español Français Русский 正體中文
Introducing the new Wikimedia Foundation CEO
14 September 2021 30 November 2021 by Wikimedia Foundation
The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees has appointed Maryana Iskander as the new CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation. Since 2013, Maryana has served as the CEO of Harambee Youth Employment Accelerator, a South African non-profit social enterprise focused on building African solutions for the global challenge of youth unemployment. Prior to this, she spent six years as Chief Operating Officer of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, a volunteer-led social movement focused on access to women's healthcare. Maryana has also worked in academia as the Advisor to the President of Rice University, an international research university based in the United States. Her professional career has been motivated by breaking down systemic barriers, creating opportunities for collaborative solution-building, and community empowerment. She has a proven track record for leading complex organisations shaped by shared decision-making.
Maryana Iskander
Below is a letter from Maryana,
"When I read the job posting for the next leader of Wikimedia Foundation, I noticed that it opened with a seemingly simple statement: 'Knowledge belongs to all of us.' Does it, really? It's a striking statement. In an increasingly unequal and polarizing world, one in which almost nothing belongs to all of us, the idea that knowledge must belong to all is enough to capture anyone's attention and imagination – certainly mine.
My story is shaped by a twin belief that knowledge can also set us free. Shortly after I was born in Cairo, Egypt, my parents left for the United States. During my time at university, graduate school, and law school, I was consistently pulled towards some of society's toughest issues – women's rights, civil rights, and the rights of prisoners. I was equally pulled by the need to be effective in making change – seeking out leadership positions and raising my hand and voice to change the institutions of power, not just protest against them. I learned that the opportunity to make meaningful impact often sits 'in-between' traditional spheres: in-between research and teaching at Rice University, in-between healthcare delivery and advocacy at Planned Parenthood, and in-between government and the private sector at Harambee Youth Employment Accelerator. My time at all of these organisations required listening to and learning from many diverse stakeholders – including volunteers – and using my position of leadership to champion often unheard voices.
In 2012, I followed my heart to South Africa and its very complicated society – a legacy of apartheid perpetuating deep inequality despite the resilience of communities full of potential and hope, and a country with one of the highest youth unemployment rates in the world. A new organisation had just been formed with a big vision to close this opportunity gap. I signed up, first as an unpaid volunteer, and then for many years as the CEO. My job has been to cultivate a common space of trust for the collective assets of the society – from government, the private sector, civil society, and millions of young people – to work in a coalition to tackle one of the most daunting challenges of our time. To do this, we relied on an inclusive, multi-channel platform that leverages all forms of technology as a way to serve communities still riddled by a basic lack of access. Our successes came from the power of connection, partnership, and a collective belief that young people are the solution, not the problem. As I began my tenth year, I felt it was time to make space for new leaders.
Why am I joining the Wikimedia Foundation at this moment? There are many reasons: (1) this collective of projects is growing what is perhaps the most important commons infrastructure of our modern world. I am excited to add my time and talents to this vision. What will it take to create – not just imagine – a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge? (2) I have experienced first-hand that distributed leadership models can usually achieve more than any group of people can do on their own. I am eager to support processes that will make this even more true for our movement; and (3) I am drawn to working with people of integrity and commitment, who also appreciate humor and joy. I can already see that I will meet new colleagues like this from all over the world.
My former colleagues will say that I believe progress is enabled by culture: one that is founded on accountability, diversity and inclusion in all its forms, and a way of working led by values. It has informed an organisational humility in working with others and a relentless focus on getting things done the right way – while doing the right thing.
During the recruitment process, I met with a leading academic in the United States named Rebecca. She told me a story of her primary school teacher asking the students to raise their hands if they did not have an encyclopedia at home. She was one of those students, and it made her feel, for the first time, that maybe she didn't have equal access to the resources needed for her education. The work of this collective community, should we achieve our vision, will make it unnecessary for a teacher to ever ask that question again. I then returned to South Africa and spoke to another Rebecca. This young woman grew up in a rural area where it was a struggle to afford text messaging, never mind any meaningful access to the digital world. She, too, did not have equal access to the resources she needed. Despite their starkly different circumstances, I believe that each Rebecca can find her own point of entry into our vision and impact as we look ahead to 2030.
What have been my prior experiences with the wikiverse?
I have had two past interactions with the people behind Wikipedia, in addition to being a reader and admirer.
First, I attended a conference in 2019 where I met a volunteer editor on English Wikipedia. The next year, he reached out to me to say that Wikipedia was looking to increase its articles about notable women, and he would write an article about me in line with Wikipedia's editing values. He eventually did this with the help of another editor from Women in Red.
Second, on World Teachers Day in October 2019, my current organisation, Harambee Youth Employment Accelerator, participated in an AfroCuration event hosted by WikiAfrica Education. It was aimed at generating new historical content on Wikipedia related to the themes of democracy, freedom, and constitution-making. The goal was to support students and teachers to create articles in indigenous languages about individuals who contributed to South Africa's remarkable Constitution.
I look forward to beginning my own editing and volunteer journey as well as my professional path in the movement.
What are three things I want to learn from you?
My first job is to listen and seek to understand.
Even before I officially join the Wikimedia Foundation in January 2022, I would like to hear from anyone who is interested in sharing directly with me. Later this month, I will share more information about a focused 'listening tour' that will take place ahead of my formal start date. It will consist of online and offline engagements across Wiki communities, as well as with Foundation staff and other stakeholders.
I know that we are many communities with many different opinions. I will of course first ask you what you think: about our vision, mission, impact, strategy, how we relate to the rest of the world, as well as our current and future ways of working and achieving our aspirations.
But I will also ask you to help me learn what you know from data, even if it differs from what you think. I am curious about the spaces 'in between' opinion and evidence – as messy or imperfect as they may be.
And finally, I want to learn what motivates you at a personal level to contribute to your projects and participate in your communities.
Thank you for taking the time to read my message. I look forward to hearing from you."
Berrely(@berrely)
Congratulations 😀
Nemo_bis(@nemo-bis)
Congratulations. I'd like to read https://www.jstor.org/stable/42893821 , can you publish it with a free license on e.g. Zenodo? See also https://cyber.harvard.edu/hoap/How_to_make_your_own_work_open_access .
Posted in Foundation, Main page (EN)
Gabriel Diamond
This comment is a violation of the Code of Conduct


text:
Home » Jazz News » G. Thomas Allen Is The Winner Of The 10th Annual Sarah Vaughan Int...
Award / Grant News
G. Thomas Allen Is The Winner Of The 10th Annual Sarah Vaughan International Jazz Vocal Competition as part of NJPAC's TD James Moody Jazz Festival
By AMT PUBLIC RELATIONS
Sign in to view read count
At a star-studded, sold-out performance held yesterday afternoon on the NJPAC stage, G. Thomas Allen (Chicago, IL) was announced the winner of the 10th Annual Sarah Vaughan International Jazz Vocal Competition. This marks the first time a male vocalist won the contest. Hosted by NJPAC's Jazz Advisor and multi-Grammy-winning bassist Christian McBride, "The SASSY Awards" featured performances by the competition's five finalists as well as a special appearance by one of today's top jazz vocalists, Dianne Reeves.
The contenders took to the stage with magnificent performances in front of a live audience. Winner G. Thomas Allen wowed the esteemed panel of judges with his rendition of "Misty", a standard recorded by Sarah Vaughan in 1964. Andrea Miller (Costa Mesa, California) performed her rendition of "Bye Bye Blackbird", April May Webb (Edison, NJ) sang "Social Call", Latvian-born Arta Jēkabsone (Jersey City, NJ) sang "Gone with the Wind", and Vik Gečytė (Paris, France) performed her rendition of "Lover Come Back to Me".
As the first-prize winner of the SASSY Awards, G. Thomas Allen received a $5,000 cash award. April May Webb, who was the runner-up, was awarded a $1,500 cash prize, and third place recipient Arta Jēkabsone won $500.
Pulled from over 160 submissions from 25 countries, the finalists performed before the distinguished panel of judges, including premier jazz pianist Renee Rosnes (West Orange, NJ), President & CEO of WBGO Radio Steven A. Williams, past winner of both the Sarah Vaughan and Thelonious Monk International Vocal Jazz Competitions Jazzmeia Horn, Paterson-born guitarist/singer John Pizzarelli, and renowned singer and NJCU professor Sheila Jordan.
The competition recalls the humble beginnings of legendary jazz singer/NEA Jazz Master Sarah Vaughan (1924-1990) who, back in 1942, was a Newark teenager and winner of an amateur singing contest at the Apollo Theater. That memorable night helped launch the lifework of one of the most successful, influential jazz vocalists in the history of American music. The competition is also known as The Sassy Awards, a nod to the nickname of singer. Past winners include Cyrille Aimee, Jazzmeia Horn, Ashleigh Smith, Arianna Neikrug, Deelee Dubé, Quiana Lynell, Laurin Talese, Samara Joy 2, Gabrielle Cavassa and Tawanda Suessbrich-Joaquim. What has become one of the top annual vocal competitions in jazz, The SASSY Awards offers outstanding jazz singers a one-of-a-kind platform for embarking on a career in the music business—and offers audience members a chance to discover the jazz stars of tomorrow. Gifted young contestants from around the world are evaluated on vocal quality, musicality, technique, performance, individuality, artistic interpretation, and ability to swing.
About G. Thomas Allen
Vocalist, composer, and music educator G. Thomas Allen is known for his remarkable vocal flexibility, warm timbre and cross-genre experimentation. He has worked with the late David Baker and the Smithsonian Jazz Masterworks Orchestra, performing Duke Ellington's: Sacred Concerts at the Strathmore Hall, and has shared the stage with influencers such as Bobby Broom, Pharez Whitted and Dennis Luxion. As bandleader, he released his debut self-titled album in 2020, which hit No. #1 of the iTunes jazz charts. Thomas is a two-time graduate of Morgan State University, with degrees in Vocal Performance and Speech Communication. He currently serves as the Jazz and Contemporary Voice Instructor at ChiArts and on the voice faculty of Columbia College Chicago (CCC).
About NJPAC
A world of entertainment just minutes from home, New Jersey Performing Arts Center (NJPAC), located in downtown Newark, N.J., is America's most diverse performing arts center, and the artistic, cultural, educational and civic center of New Jersey—where great performances and events enhance and transform lives every day. NJPAC brings diverse communities together, providing access to all and showcasing the state's and the world's best artists while acting as a leading catalyst in the revitalization of its home city. Through its extensive Arts Education programs, NJPAC is shaping the next generation of artists and arts enthusiasts. NJPAC has attracted nearly 10 million visitors (including over 1.7 million children) since opening its doors in 1997, and nurtures meaningful and lasting relationships with each of its constituents.
For more information contact AMT Public Relations.
Instrument: Voice / vocals
Award / Grant AMT Public Relations April Thibeault United States New Jersey Newark G. Thomas Allen
Jazz Near Newark
Events Guide | Venue Guide | Local Businesses | More...
Yonathan Peled
////bc
THE OUTER VIEW
Marshall Gilkes, Trevor Dunn and Others
with Jerome Wilson
Saxophonist/Composer Alex Weiss Exhibits His Surrealist Jazz Conception On 'Most Don't Have Enough,'...
Terri Hinte Publicity
Landmark Album From Jazz Guitar Legend Louis Stewart Re-Issued
Livia Records
SortiesJAZZnights.com Celebrates Its 20th Anniversary At Montreal's O Patro Vys on January 20, 2023
Claude Thibault
Thailand International Jazz Conference 2023 - The 14th Year Of The TIJC With The Extensive Program
Thailand International Jazz Conference
Performance / Tour
Conrad Herwig & The Latin Side All-Stars Kick of Tuesday Night Residency At The Django - Celebrating...
Jason Byrne, Red Cat Publicity
Nashville Saxophonist/Composer Don Aliquo Expands His Creative Horizons With 'Growth,' Set For Feb....
Jazzahead! 2023 Announces Thirty-Six Showcase Artists / Bands
Jazzahead!
World-Renowned Smoke Jazz Club Announces February Line-Up Including Louis Hayes, Kurt Rosenwinkel,...
AMT Public Relations
All About Jazz Premium Musician Page Service Upgrade
Giacomo Gates Sings The Song, Tony Adamo Writes The Music
Tony Adamo
Gretchen Carhartt Valade Detroit Businesswoman and 'Angel of Jazz'
DL Media
We'll Meet Again—American Jazz Standards with Jaimee Paul and Leif Shires at John F. Kennedy Center...
Maura Dunno
New York's Longest Running Jazz Concert Series 'Highlights In Jazz' Celebrates 50 Years With Gala...
Jim Eigo, Jazz Promo Services
Guitarist Dave Stryker to release 'Prime' with Jared Gold and McClenty Hunter on Strikezone Records
Crowdfunding Campaign
Jack Wilkins, famed guitarist, home again after second visit to hospital in a year
Craft Recording Celebrates the Enduring Legacy of Savoy Records and the Revolutionary Bebop Era with...


Synopsis: An HBO film based on the 2007 biography "Oscar Micheaux: The Great and Only: The Life of America's First Black Filmmaker" by film historian Patrick McGilligan.
Note: Tyler Perry will be a producer on this project, but not a director. I haven't found any updates on this project since the original announcement but am keep fingers crossed its still in the works.